Quality of training in radiation oncology in Germany. Results of a 2006 survey.

PURPOSE: To evaluate residents' satisfaction with their training in radiation oncology, the first nationwide survey was done in 2006. Results were presented at the 2006 annual meeting of the German Society of Radiation Oncology (DEGRO). MATERIAL AND METHODS: A questionnaire with 39 questions regarding training in radiation oncology in Germany was developed and sent by e-mail. Questionnaires were returned by mail and analyzed anonymously. RESULTS: 96 questionnaires were received. A total of 88% of respondents are pleased with their decision of training in radiation oncology. Residents are strongly motivated by their interest in oncology. Quality of training is heterogeneous and not optimal. Training in three-dimensional treatment planning, radiochemotherapy and intracavitary brachytherapy is judged adequate, whereas special techniques such as intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) and permanent prostate implants are not covered by the majority of institutions. Organization of training in the departments is often judged insufficient. CONCLUSION: Radiation oncology is attractive for young doctors. However, training quality for radiation oncologists in Germany was judged to be heterogeneous and needs to be optimized. For this, results of this survey may be helpful. The overall positive judgment may help to attract more students into the field of radiation oncology, an issue that becomes increasingly important given the shortage of doctors and the strong competition with other disciplines. Modern techniques, such as IMRT, need to be integrated into training programs in order to maintain the high standard of radiation oncology in Germany.

Quality control of involved field radiotherapy in patients with early-favorable (HD10) and early-unfavorable (HD11) Hodgkin's lymphoma: an analysis of the German Hodgkin Study Group.

PURPOSE: The German Hodgkin Study Group (GHSG) set up a radiotherapy (RT) reference center within the Department of Radiation Oncology at the University of Cologne to undertake quality assurance of the group's clinical studies. In the HD10 trial (early-favorable stages) and HD11 trial (early-unfavorable stages) all patients received involved field (IF)-RT (30 Gy vs. 20 Gy) within a combined-modality approach. For these patients a central prospective review of all diagnostic imaging was performed by expert radiation oncologists to control disease extension and to define IF treatment volume. METHODS AND MATERIALS: On the basis of simulation films, verification films, and radiotherapy case report form (CRF) an expert panel evaluated retrospectively the adequacy of irradiated IF treatment portals according to the RT prescription, applied radiation doses, treatment time, and technical parameters. RESULTS: Between 1999 and 2006 a total of 825 of 1370 randomized patients of the HD10 trial (60%) and 954 of 1422 patients of the HD11 trial (67%) were evaluated by the panel. Radiotherapy was rated as suboptimal in 47% of all reviewed cases. Although the participating RT centers received a precise RT prescription, most difficulties occurred in the adequate coverage of the IF (40%), followed by technical faults (12%). Deviations from the prescribed single daily dose (1.8-2 Gy), weekly dose, and total reference dose were rare (1%). CONCLUSIONS: As a consequence of these findings, radiation oncologists were trained on the definition of IF-RT at GHSG meetings and at the annual meetings of the German Society for Therapeutic Radiation Oncology. Possible correlations between RT quality and relapse rate will be investigated.

A Contribution to solve the problem of the need for consolidative radiotherapy after intensive chemotherapy in advanced stages of Hodgkin's lymphoma--analysis of a quality control program initiated by the radiotherapy reference center of the German Hodgkin Study Group (GHSG).

PURPOSE: The role of radiotherapy (RT) after intensive chemotherapy in patients with advanced stage Hodgkin's lymphoma (HL) is still unclear. The German Hodgkin Study Group (GHSG) randomized HD12 trial was designed to test whether consolidative RT in the region of initial bulky disease and of residual disease is necessary after effective chemotherapy. A quality control program based on a multidisciplinary panel of radiation oncologists, radiologists, and medical oncologists who reviewed all patients' staging and restaging imaging was initiated. METHODS AND MATERIALS: A total of 1661 patients aged 16 to 65 years with HL in Stage IIB (large mediastinal mass and/or E-lesions) or Stage III to IV were randomized from January 1999 to January 2003 according to a factorial design between: 8 esc.BEACOPP + RT (arm A), 8 esc.BEACOPP non-RT (arm B), 4+4BEACOPP + RT (arm C), 4+4BEACOPP non-RT (arm D). RESULTS: In the fifth interim analysis, 1449 patients were eligible for the arm comparison with regard to RT. After a median observation time of 48 months the FFTF rate was 86% and the OS 92%. The FFTF was 95% in the RT arms A+C and 88% in the non-RT arms B+D: no sequential significant difference. One thousand and eighty four patients were evaluated by the panel. The panel defined initial bulky disease in 800 patients and residual disease in 600 patients. The panel recommended continuation of therapy according to the randomization for 934 of 1084 patients and additive RT independently from the randomization arm for 145 of 1084 patients. CONCLUSIONS: The study showed that RT can be reduced substantially after effective chemotherapy. However, because of the irradiation of 10% of patients in the non-RT arms, equivalent effectiveness of a non-RT strategy cannot be proved. A substantial limitation of consolidative RT according to expert panel recommendations appears to be possible without reducing effectiveness.

Centralized radiation oncologic review of cross-sectional imaging of Hodgkin's disease leads to significant changes in required involved field-results of a quality assurance program of the German Hodgkin Study Group.

PURPOSE: To guarantee the treatment quality of involved-field radiotherapy (IF-RT) of patients in the Hodgkin's disease (HD)10 and HD11 trials of the German Hodgkin Study Group, with 460 participating study centers, a quality assurance program was conducted. It was based on a central prospective radiation oncologic review of all patients' entire diagnostic imaging and clinical findings. An individual RT prescription was provided for every study patient. The purpose of the present investigation was to assess the feasibility of such a procedure and its impact on the final definition of disease extension and patient treatment. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Between 1998 and 2002, 1371 patients were enrolled into the HD10 trial (early-stage disease) and 1570 patients into the HD11 trial (intermediate-stage disease). The HD10 trial tested four cycles of Adriamycin (doxorubicin), bleomycin, vinblastine, and dacarbazine (ABVD) against two cycles of ABVD followed by 20 Gy of IF-RT vs. 30 Gy of IF-RT (four study arms). The HD11 trial compared four cycles of ABVD with four cycles of BEACOPP (bleomycin, etoposide, doxorubicin, cyclophosphamide, vincristine, procarbazine, and prednisone) baseline followed by 20 Gy IF-RT vs. 30 Gy IF-RT in a four-arm design. All study centers were required to score disease involvement at a total of 34 possible anatomic sites on case report forms and send them, together with all diagnostic imaging, to the RT reference center in Cologne, Germany. Images were reviewed there by a panel of expert radiation oncologists and radiologists and compared with the case report form. Differences between the disease involvement documented by the participating center and the reference center were recorded. Subsequently, an individualized treatment proposal was compiled. Complete sets of documentation were submitted to the reference center for 89% of the patients in both HD10 and HD11. RESULTS: A considerable proportion of involved sites were incorrectly recorded on the corresponding case report form by the participating center. For patients with early-stage HD (HD10), there was a correction of disease involvement in 49% (593 of 1214 patients) and for patients with intermediate-stage HD (HD11) in 67% (936 of 1397 patients). Most discrepancies were seen in the lower mediastinum (23%), infraclavicular (17%), upper cervical (16%), supraclavicular (13%), and pulmonary hilar region (13%). This resulted in a change of disease stage in 41 of those 1,529 patients whose documented disease involvement had to be corrected (2.7%). Ninety-three patients had to be treated in a different protocol, because of changes in stage and risk factors. Owing to incorrect lymph node documentation of the participating centers, the RT treatment volume had to be enlarged in 891 (34%) and reduced in 82 (3%) of 2,611 patients. CONCLUSION: A central prospective review of patient data and consecutive prescription of individual RT treatment volume is feasible within large multicenter trials for HD. Such a procedure has a significant impact on the correctness of stage definition, allocation to treatment groups, and extent of the IF treatment volume.

Initiation of a teleradiotherapeutic network for patients in German lymphoma studies.

PURPOSE: Deviations of radiation treatment portals and dose from prospective treatment plans are unfavorable prognostic factors for lymphoma patients. Therefore, an extensive radiotherapy quality assurance program is used in the ongoing German lymphoma studies. The introduction of teleradiotherapy offered the opportunity to optimize and simplify the workflow of these quality assurance programs. The purpose of this report was to evaluate the feasibility of teleradiotherapy and to describe our experiences with these innovative tools. METHODS AND MATERIALS: During this pilot phase, five radiotherapy centers were equipped with the hardware and software that guarantees a rapid and high-quality transfer of imaging data, as well as real-time teleconferences. The workstation consists of standard PCs with Windows NT as the operating system and the commercial telemedicine software Hipax. RESULTS: As a first step, imaging communication between the radiotherapy reference centers in Cologne and Homburg/Saar was established. Subsequently, three additional radiotherapy departments (Universities of Berlin, Münster, and Munich) with large numbers of lymphoma patients were connected. Other study centers delivered digital imaging on mobile data carriers or via an Integrated Services Digital Network point-to-point connection. Communication units were completed for interactive teleconferences. A facility for central online documentation was installed. Telemedical functions were integrated into the ongoing radiotherapy quality assurance program. Since the introduction of a teleradiotherapeutic workstation in the radiotherapy reference center in Cologne in January 2001, the images of 10% (n = 228 patients) of all reviewed cases of the ongoing Hodgkin's disease 10-12 trials were delivered digitally. The amount of digitally available imaging is continuously increasing. CONCLUSION: The introduction of teleradiotherapy improved the dialog between the radiotherapy reference centers and study centers and thus contributed toward high radiotherapy quality for lymphoma patients in Germany.

[New therapeutic strategies for Hodgkin lymphoma in cooperation of radiation oncology and medical oncology]. / Neue Therapiestrategien des Morbus Hodgkin in Kooperation von Radioonkologie und Internistischer Onkologie.

BACKGROUND: Between 1984 and 2002 more than 9500 pts. were enrolled in the multicentric randomized trials of the German Hodgkin Study Group (GHSG) and are evaluable for response, survival, recurrences, and toxicities. Actually the GHSG evaluates the efficacy of risk-adapted therapy composed of polychemotherapy (CT) and radiotherapy (RT). An extensive RT quality assurance program has been practiced during the study generations and will be continued. PATIENTS AND METHODS: The 4th study generation (1998-2002) includes the following trials: In the HD10 trial (early stages) 4x ABVD are tested against 2x ABVD followed by 20 Gy Involved Field (IF)-RT vs. 30 Gy IF-RT (4 arms). In order to optimize CT-regimen and IF-RT dose for pts. with intermediate stage, the HD11 trial compares 4x ABVD with 4x BEACOPP baseline followed by 20 Gy IF-RT vs. 30 Gy IF-RT in a 4 arm design. Concerning advanced stages (HD12), the BEACOPP regimen is to be optimized and the necessity of additive RT is tested. The standard arm (8x BEACOPP escalated) is compared with the toxicity reduced arm (4x BEACOPP escalated + 4x BEACOPP baseline) followed by 30 Gy RT on initial bulky disease and/or residual tumor vs. no RT (4 arms). RESULTS: Interim results (without arm comparisons) with a median follow-up of 18 months for HD10 and HD11 and 20 months for HD12 are as follows: Freedom from Treatment Failure (FFTF) at 18 months is in the HD10 trial (390 pts.) 96.4%, in the HD11 trial (480 pts.) 91.5% and in the HD12 trial (550 pts.) 90.2%.The overall survival (OS) at 18 months is in HD10 98.2%, in HD11 98.5%, in HD12 93.5%. In HD10, HD11 and HD12 respectively, 1.8%, 1.9% and 2.5% of pts. died and 1.0%, 2.5% and 2.2% suffered early progression. CONCLUSION/FURTHER STRATEGY: In order to reduce the relapse rate and toxicity and to improve the quality of life, the new HD13 trial for early stages (Fig. 1a) compares 2x ABVD, 2x ABV, 2x AVD und 2x AV, each followed by 30 Gy IF-RT. For the intermediate stages, the FFTF rate should be improved by intensifying the standard regimen. Therefore the new trial HD14 (Fig. 1b) compares 4x ABVD with 2x BEACOPP escalated + 2x ABVD, each followed by 30 Gy IF-RT. In the new trial for advanced stages HD15 (Fig. 1c),the FFTF/OS rates are to be maintained and the quality of life to be improved. 8x BEACOPP escalated, 6x BEACOPP escalated and 8x BEACOPP baseline with shortened 14-day cycle are compared. The use of PET to decide on additive RT will also be investigated.